Tax Credit Dispute: Petitioner Granted 30-Day Window to Respond to Show Cause Notices for 2019-21 Financial Years

HC ruled on tax credit show cause notices, directing petitioner to respond within 30 days to notices for financial years 2019-20 and 2020-21. The court granted liberty to seek time extension and pursue legal remedies if aggrieved. Proper Officer instructed to provide specific information and adjudicate notice in compliance with legal procedures, without examining substantive merits of the case.

---

---

Issues involved: Show cause notices regarding irregular availment of input tax credit for financial years 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21; Lack of specific details in the notice; Request for time extension to respond to the notice; Alleged discrepancy without a formal show cause notice; Time limitation for adjudicating the notice.

Summary:

1. Lack of Specific Details in Show Cause Notices:
The petitioner was aggrieved by show cause notices concerning irregular availment of input tax credit for the mentioned financial years. The notices lacked specific details regarding the alleged mis-match or irregular availment, leading to a request for more time to respond. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the absence of clarity due to the lack of a formal show cause notice apart from the audit observation.

2. Time Extension Request and Response:
The counsel for the petitioner sought time from the Proper Officer to respond to the show cause notice, which was not granted. However, the respondent's counsel accepted notice and mentioned that the limitation for adjudicating the show cause notice for the financial year 2018-19 ends on a specific date. The Proper Officer assured to provide specific information upon query by the petitioner within the adjudication timeline.

3. Disposal of Petition and Response Deadline:
The petition was disposed of with a direction for the petitioner to file a response to the show cause notice for the financial year 2019-20 and 2020-21 within 30 days. The petitioner's counsel mentioned the voluminous record and potential need for time extension, which can be requested from the department, to be considered in accordance with the law.

4. Further Proceedings and Remedies:
The petitioner was instructed to appear before the Sales Tax Officer for clarification or queries on the specified date. The officer was tasked with adjudicating the notice in compliance with the law. Additionally, the petitioner was granted the liberty to pursue further legal remedies if aggrieved by any subsequent orders from the Proper Officer.

5. Court's Clarification:
The judgment clarified that the Court did not delve into the merits of either party's case, maintaining a neutral stance on the matter.

---